Alpha. All right. There is no such a law that if you get my recipe you have to tell everybody who you got it from! You will not advertise me and I don't owe you anything whatsoever, but you do!
Gamma. Who was talking about a law?
Alpha. Law is reality, isn't it? What are we talking about if it does not concern reality?
Teacher. This is a new turn in our conversation. We haven't discussed existing laws yet. We are discussing relations and discrepancies between the worlds of culture and civilization...
Alpha. Where do laws belong?
Teacher. Wherever they belong, they change. I would say that we want to figure out what a law is supposed to be to ideally fit specifics and relations of culture and civilization. I think we have to comprehend these realities before we start talking about law...
Alpha. You never said that.
Teacher. Of course I didn't. Law was not that subject I was interested in. We can discuss it later, if we find it suitable.
Alpha. OK, how can we resolve the last question, if we do not turn to law?
Beta. I like the idea that we have to figure out what a law is supposed to be in order to serve...
Alpha. To serve what? Or who? You or me?
Kappa. Or the customers, or the audience, or the general public, or the country, or... I don't know who else, mankind?
Delta. Law is to serve the people and the country. We have to look at the issue from this stand point.
Teacher. May I narrow this down a bit? Our question can sound like this: in which case does a law serves Alpha, and Beta, and our country best? The first case is when Beta is required to pay royalties for usage of Alpha's recipe. The second case is when Beta is required to give Alpha proper attribution.
Alpha. Why not both?
Kappa. True, why not?
Delta. Well, if you ask 'why not,' someone may ask 'why yes?'
Beta. I agree. We have to put forward criteria.
Gamma. We already did. It is the general well being, including Alpha's and Beta's. If everyone is better off under a law, that means the law is a just one.
Alpha. How can we judge that?
Delta. We cannot... If we do not try.
Beta. Look, if I have to pay royalties, this compromises my business and decreases my competitiveness. I can do everything as good as Alpha does. I can make meals as fresh and delicious, I can maintain the premises as comfortable, I can put as much money in marketing and still I will be in a weaker position in terms of business: I will have to reduce my earnings, while Alpha will get additional money from my efforts...
Alpha. ...Which is absolutely fair, because you built your business on my recipe!
Delta. The business is built by Beta's effort.
Gamma. Well, it is natural that Alpha wants Beta to share his money, but what about our criteria? What is good for people? It is obvious that if two of your businesses compete in equal conditions, then all of your customers win... By the way, I recalled my question...
Alpha. Remember, what Beta offered? He wanted to advertise me for free! Does this not put me in better conditions?
Beta. Yes, it does. But this will not take money from my business.
Alpha. Really? This will take some customers from you. Is this not the same?
Teacher. I see a difference between the two methods. In the case of royalties, we have to set up and enforce some artificial measurements to take money from Beta's business. This becomes specifically questionable, if Beta gets no profits and his business may die. In that case Alpha will get no royalties at all...
Alpha. In that case I got rid of a competitor and this is good.
Kappa. For you, probably. Not for the public.
Delta. I doubt even this is always good for Alpha.
Alpha. And why is that?
Teacher. May I finish?
Alpha, Delta, Kappa. Sorry.
Teacher. ...So, in the case of attribution, when Beta just honestly says, who he learned the recipe from, this does not necessarily mean he loses. He can even gain.
Alpha. And how is that?.. Sorry.
Teacher. That's OK. When Beta says who taught him the recipe, he appeals to people's feelings. Some of his customers would certainly be curious to go to Alpha's place, but some would admire the fact of the tribute. Both businesses get in more solid relations with their patrons and public in general...
Kappa. By the way, Alpha can also tell who learned from him.
Alpha. Aha, sure...
Delta. Why not? This certainly adds credibility to your business...
Gamma. Two times, by the way: firstly, it implies that the recipe is worthy, because it gets followers; secondly, if you are not afraid to name a competitor, this means your business is that strong that you are not afraid.
Kappa. I like this! A shared recipe benefits everybody, even when attribution is given!
Beta. Because attribution is given! Not 'even when,' but 'because!' This is how things differ in culture and civilization! If Alpha wants my money, we both can lose! When we share ideas, we both win! This is how it works! This is how they are different! I never expected it turns out this way! This is terrific!!!
Gamma. Wow! I've never seen Beta so excited!
Teacher. Me neither.
Kappa. It is good that he didn't jump on the desk, like someone else sometime ago...
Teacher. Gamma, what about your question? Are you still keeping it?
Gama. Aha.When you cook some exotic meal, a lot of different ideas, inventions and techniques are used, right?
Teacher. Definitely.
Gamma. What about all those?
Alpha. What about them?
Gamma. What about them? Think for a second. If you want royalties from Beta, thousands of other people may ask for royalties from you! What do you think?
Delta. So everybody will have to sit down and calculate royalties day and night and do nothing else.
Gamma. And this will make no sense at all.
Beta. And then they'll forget about the royalties one day, stand up, and go about their business like normal people.
Kappa. I have a declaration to make!
Delta. Jump on your desc and make it!
Kappa. Thank you Delta. I am fine. May I?
Teacher. You sure may.
Kappa. People have to share ideas in order for civilization to exist!
Alpha. Impressive... I have one proposition and one question.
Teacher. Go ahead.
Alpha. Thank you. The question goes first. Suppose, I go with attribution. What about those thousands of ideas now? Do I have to sit down and write down all ideas I use, to conduct a research to determine their authors and then to attach tons of paper with references to every single menu, plate, napkin and so forth?.. Now, here is my proposition. Beta does not have to pay royalties all life long, but for some limited time. How about that?
Kappa. In the beginning or later?
Gamma. How much later?
Alpha. Who knows, what happens later?
Kappa. OK, Alpha, so you want royalties at that very time when it is the most difficult for Beta, right?
Alpha. But for a limited time! A business is always difficult in the beginning, anyway!
Kappa. Then let it be even more difficult, right?
Alpha. Why should I care?
Teacher. We agreed on some criteria, remember?
Delta. I remember and I remember that essentially we reached some conclusion: free sharing of ideas plus honest attribution boosts businesses, competition and thus, benefits everybody!
Gamma. Yes, and why would we look for anything else?
Beta. Well, Alpha can argue that profits reward businessmen efforts and benefit the public in the end, but how then is creativity itself rewarded?
Gamma. By attribution, how else? You created it. People who use it, honestly say so. Everybody knows you and your role in the invention, and recognizes your impact...
Delta. People call or write to you, invite you to give lectures...
Alpha. Me?
Kappa. Aha, Alpha, you! Do you like that more?
Alpha. What's more? More than what?
Teacher. There were two options.
Alpha. I told you, I'd like both. Everyone would, I'm sure.
Gamma. Well, OK, then we won't ask you. We'll turn to the criteria of public good instead.
Alpha. All right, you haven't answered my question, remember? In the meantime, I have something else to tell you all. Gamma rightly said that it is very natural for me (and I believe it is so for everyone) to wish for both: royalties and attribution as well. Therefore, if you don't give me all I want, I wouldn't like it! Then if I come up with yet another recipe, I will not reveal it whatsoever!
Kappa. And what is the point? What will you get?
Alpha. I'll have my monopoly over it - that's what I'll get. I'll not have competition - that's what I'll get. My business will grow - that's what I'll get. And that's it - and nothing else! What do you think?
Delta. You will have to put money in marketing.
Alpha. So?
Delta. So? If you don't have big bucks for that, forget about growing.
Alpha. Really? And what is my other option?
Delta. Another option? I am going to tell something really new: reveal your recipe in exchange for attribution.
Alpha. Ah, it is new. And?
Beta. And what? Haven't we discussed it all?
Kappa. Yea, Alpha, haven't we?
Alpha. You probably did, I probably wasn't here.
Teacher. Alpha, you were here.
Alpha. All right, I am stupid, can anyone repeat it for me one more time?
Kappa. Alpha, you are not stupid.
Alpha. I'm not?
Kappa. Nope.
Teacher. I agree with Kappa.
Alpha. So?
Beta. So, you repeat yourself what we concluded earlier.
Alpha. You concluded?
Beta. Yes, we, I, Kappa, Gamma, Delta, our Teacher and with your participation... And if you disagree with the conclusions, explain why.
Gamma. Yes, Alpha, please. You can do it.
Alpha. I can... if I want.
Teacher. Why wouldn't you want it?
Gamma. Yea, Alpha, why? We are not enemies here, we just have different ideas.
Alpha. Exactly. Different ideas we have, we do.
Gamma. Well, I believe they all deserve some respect...
Alpha. And I displayed disrespect, right?
Beta. I would say so. You don't even want to repeat others' ideas. How would you call this kind of attitude?
Teacher. It is interesting, really.
Alpha. It seems like tricks and games to me...
Teacher. Why?
Alpha. OK, does anyone want to repeat after me?
Beta. It is not that I want to, but I can, if you wish me to.
Teacher. Yes, Beta, please do. Let it be our first summary today. Do you mind, Alpha?
Alpha. (Shrugs)...
- Войдите, чтобы оставлять комментарии